Oregon? I have problems with this as well, the licensing isn't hard, nor that expensive, but they require you to have a ccb license or the locksmith certification isn't valid. The ccb part is the expensive part and I don't find it to be necessary just a revenue maker for the state.

I believe that most licensing states justify the license concept by promising the public locksmiths that: have insurance, pass a criminal background check, are technically up to date with continuing education, and are generally ethical. Check out Parkinsons Law. A beauracracy's primary purpose is to make itself bigger. They had to hire more people and enlarge the govt. overhead to provide this public service.However, they reap a lot of license and processing fees, sell a lot of insurance, and financially assist a lot of training organizations in providing continuing education that is mostly a waste of time. Some even charge the instructors to meet the same licensing and fee requirements even if they are from out of state.Maybe it cuts down on the fly-by-nighters but not much.

Nothing is foolproof to a talented fool. Wisdom is not just in determining how to do something, but also includes determining whether it should be done at all.

thelockpickkid wrote:Oregon? I have problems with this as well, the licensing isn't hard, nor that expensive, but they require you to have a ccb license or the locksmith certification isn't valid. The ccb part is the expensive part and I don't find it to be necessary just a revenue maker for the state.

Well, you must have liability insurance and bond. This is not just for locksmith, but every trade. I think most customers prefer that they have the solvency to cover for damage they cause.

You don't want fly by the night one man lockie accidentally drilling a hole through a water pipe, but not have the asset or insurance to pay for damage.

thelockpickkid wrote:Oregon? I have problems with this as well, the licensing isn't hard, nor that expensive, but they require you to have a ccb license or the locksmith certification isn't valid. The ccb part is the expensive part and I don't find it to be necessary just a revenue maker for the state.

Well, you must have liability insurance and bond. This is not just for locksmith, but every trade. I think most customers prefer that they have the solvency to cover for damage they cause.

You don't want fly by the night one man lockie accidentally drilling a hole through a water pipe, but not have the asset or insurance to pay for damage.

The hangup I have is that if somebody is locked out of there house, if I pick the lock, they want me to have a ccb license and a locksmith license. If I go to there house and take the doorknob off to rekey it, then they want me to have a ccb and locksmith license. I think it is crap. I have a 15,000 dollar bond that would cover anything that I may break. It's not like I am installing a door and drilling the holes for the knob. That I can understand having a ccb license for. But simply rekeying or picking, thats is crap. Thats my opinion. I would bet money on most locksmiths in the area near me not having a ccb license, and I bet the other half still don't have the locksmith license either. Not trying to make you mad as you have a valid point, I just think the government is regulating hard working honest people out of work.